One of the things that has come out of our discussions with I18N has, I
think, been that we better understand the relationship between sequences
of characters and markup. Whilst I18N did not specifically point out
this flaw in the current syntax spec, I think it should be attributed to
their input.
Consider the test case:
<rdf:Description>
<eg:prop rdf:parseType="Literal"><em>&lt;br /></em></eg:prop>
</rdf:Description>
If my reading of the syntax document [1] is correct, it states that this
is equivalent to (with a little license in the syntax):
_:a <eg:prop> "<em><br /></em>"^^rdf:XMLLiteral .
I believe that should read
_:a <eg:prop> "<em>&lt;br /></em>^^ rdf:XMLLiteral .
or some variation on that theme, to preserve the distinction between
markup and content. We need to decide exactly what characters get
escaped.
DaveB: is my reading of syntax correct?
Martin/I18N - would you endorse this comment?
Brian
[1]
http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/#parseTypeLiteralPropertyElt